On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 03:16:19PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > Forwarding, on request: > > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 04:53:43 -0400 > From: Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: undisclosed-recipients: ; > Subject: Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] update from gnulib > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-09-08) > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 05:57:36PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hum, to me the gnulib update side is under your control, I don't > feel it's necessary for you to post the patch, unless you know there > may be an associated change for the other developpers. Others may disagree > but I don't think I can really review those :-)
Yep, I agree - its fine to update gnulib and just notify the list afterwards. There's nothing we can sensibly review in the patch, and after all, the whole point of gnulib is that other people have already reviewed & tested this for us :-) Dan. -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, Boston -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
